So they want to sue somebody for selling something legally to somebody who was legally allowed to purchase it. Sue them for WHAT, exactly?

The thing with this shooting is that even if he didn't shoot anyone, if he stole the guns, drove to the school, shot out the door and laid down on the ground, he still would have committed enough felonies to lock him up for the rest of his life. To look at that and go "Clearly we need more laws!" is beyond stupid.

Final judgments or decrees rendered by the highest court of a State in which a decision could be had, may be reviewed by the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari where the validity of a treaty or statute of the United States is drawn in question or where the validity of a statute of any State is drawn in question on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States, or where any title, right, privilege, or immunity is specially set up or claimed under the Constitution or the treaties or statutes of, or any commission held or authority exercised under, the United States.

I can't find the article but it was a masterful treatise on the three-pronged assault taking place on the 2a...

In short:

1) Outlaw as broad a spectrum of firearms possible that can be obtained by citizens
2) Severely limit the people that can obtain firearms by various methods including unilaterally constricting the definition of who is fit to purchase firearms.
3) For the few people left that can purchase the watered down firearms, make the system to do so so onerous that they will basically give up.

I would add a fourth:

4) If a firearm is used in a defensive situation make justifying it so socially, legally and financially debilitating as to make it unpalatable..

I can't find the article but it was a masterful treatise on the three-pronged assault taking place on the 2a...

In short:

1) Outlaw as broad a spectrum of firearms possible that can be obtained by citizens
2) Severely limit the people that can obtain firearms by various methods including unilaterally constricting the definition of who is fit to purchase firearms.
3) For the few people left that can purchase the watered down firearms, make the system to do so so onerous that they will basically give up.

I would add a fourth:

4) If a firearm is used in a defensive situation make justifying it so socially, legally and financially debilitating as to make it unpalatable..